It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Can your TV be used as a Camera to Watch you?

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 09:52 AM
reply to post by LightSpeedDriver

It's all part of the emerging concept of ubiquity.

Yes, almost anything is possible these days, and the examples you provided are just the tip of the iceberg, however generally we are heading towards the real-time use of this information, where the information is dumped as soon as it is logged, other than points of interest, and truly anonymous data, precisely because of the privacy issues.

There are isolated incidents of abuse, but these are mainly by individuals and private organisations. Part of the problem is that policy is having a very hard time keeping up with the rate of technological advancement, which is why in terms of these systems we are seeing a ground up tendency rather than a top-down tendency. A good example is Arab Springs, where the ground up use of technology essentially brought down the government.

Also, they are not recording and storing your phone calls. In a sense, your calls are being monitored, and terms of interest are flagged and your location and number may be recorded, but the calls themselves are not (SMS is a different matter), especially in the US. Funnily enough, the NSA does more of this monitoring outside the US than inside the US due to the US's constitution (the NSA is a scary entity, but even they are being overwhelmed by the rate of information).

It is happening regardless of whether you like it or not, all that is left is to be aware of it and add your voice to how these systems are used, and who "owns" the information.

ETA: Google Earth/Maps is a great example. It is now listed as a public good due to the benefits to geo-spatial areas, even though it is still privately owned, and yes, there are examples of it being abused but the benefits far outweigh the negatives, and I don't think that anyone would seriously like to see it become unavailable to the public. It would be almost impossible to do anyway... I have huge portions of it stored myself, and if it were to go down, (me, with the help of some programming friends), could rebuild it and make it publicly available again.
edit on 3-12-2011 by puzzlesphere because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 10:30 AM
i have to say good thing we live in a completely corruption free government of the people for the people in a freely elected democratic republic under a costitution or we would be like so !#$@%@#

kinda makes me wonder tho all these products are made in the prison that is china, not like the chinese workers could or would do anything to warn us if it were true. an acctual camera i doubt but the ability to somehow use the screen/speakers. if the tech exsisted and i was a poker player id bet all in they were doing so. more likely it would be audio not video tho as we have the tech to record audio and have a computer "listen" for words/patterns and flag for a human to not ruling video out if they have software that lets a machine watch us they would.

if you take into account the rescent mafia convictions thru the remotely turning on of the mafias smart phones microphone/camera (on or off)and subsequent supreme court ruling in the governments favor that it was ok(they did have a wire tap warrant). or the episode of the school watching its students at their homes thru the school supplied laptop or college girls finding out the hard way you want to physicaly cover your webcam. combined with the whole wii/kinect camera michrophone systems being voluntarily hooked to power/internet......

posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 11:11 AM
Your TV spying on you? Of course!
I heard this twenty years ago from a cable TV tech:
Fiber optics is a two way transmitter/receiver. No additional camera is needed.

posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 11:39 AM
Hello all first reply on here so here goes,
I don't think they need too really, as I have heard of late...Facebook has managed to achieve where Hitler failed. With the amount of camera's we have watching us, loyalty cards etc, I don't suppose they would benefit from seeing us lot in our jim jams scoffing pringles. But I bet they could if they wanted too. I don't have a tv, its the safest way. P.s nice to meet you all, what a great site! p.p.s Hope I am allowed to paste links (thought you may like it)

posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 11:42 AM
Why? Who would have the time to sift through the 3 billion hours of video per month (or much more)? I can't even fathom the sort of workforce that would be necessary to watch people lazing around, playing games, watching tv, fighting, making out on the couch, having a party, sleeping on the couch, kids doing their homework, etc. What in the world would be the point of the videos? Keep tabs on WHAT?

It's like the folks in my office - I do IT work, and work for a large company. Some people ask "Do they watch what I am doing and browsing?" No.. because every company I have worked for, can barely keep up with the normal day-to-day activities, and the last thing they have time to do is even GLANCE at a weekly report to see which people are not actually working while at work. Companies in this day and age when they keep a minimalist staff and try to grind the most out of them, don't have time to play nanny. Any more than the government would have the staff, time OR desire to watch millions and billions of hours of worthless video.

So.. while sure, the technology is probably there, no.. I don't think people are being "spyed" on by anyone. There is no time.. no money.. no point to do such a thing.

posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 11:49 AM
reply to post by fleabit

You say you work in IT?
Have you never heard of spy-ware? They don't need humans to monitor you. The spyware does it for them?

posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 12:39 PM
I studied electronics and telecommunications, and had a few "interesting" professors who had worked in the military. One of them spent some time with the CIA, with CSIS (the Canadian version of the CIA basically) and a short stint with the NSA.

While they wouldn't ever talk about specific "projects", they loved discussing alternate concepts.

One of these concepts was how to use a CRT television as a transmitter. CRT monitors use an electron beam, which is essentially being shot out at the screen from behind, essentially some of that electron beam also permeates through the screen and into the room. The electron beam travels out and contacts and reflects off of objects in the room, somewhat similar to radar.

While the tv doesn't broadcast out to anyone back over the wires, a CRT television or monitor while turned on sends out a jumbled mix of radiation patterns which when demodulated a certain way would reveal rough outlines and shapes of whatever (and whoever) was standing in front of the tv. Easy enough for a surveillance van outside of a house to pick up.

LCD, LED and PLASMA tv's don't work this way. Only CRT.

posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 12:39 PM
the wiring and hardware on a tv only works one way.
they would have to put a camera, like the ones for video game systems, on your tv, and hide it to have a tv to work both ways.

maybe if the wires for the speakers were reversed, some one could try to pull very crude audio from it, but even then there would have to be extra equipment for someone to recieve audio, or video.

posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 12:46 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 02:58 PM
Assume the US has 40,000,000 screens running 4 hours per day 7 days per week.
Assume 1 spy can watch 10 screens 8 hours per day 5 days per week.
You would need 3.5 million government spys to watch us.
In 2010 the total US government work force was 4.4 million.
That’s 1 percent of the total US population just to watch us.
And no one talked……..

All this talk about how they are doing it is BS!
Grow up people. Get a life!
No one cares a rats wazoo what you do until it infringes on someone else's.

posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 03:10 PM
Its only the tip of the iceberg-

Funny thing is... its so out there in koo koo land the NSA NRO and some others with the koo koo land technologies get arrogant with a false sense of security. Look at Stephen Jones---real smart guy but the poor guy still is stuck in the thermate theory.

Good news and bad news... there are powers out there that the powers and principalities that rule this planet are still unaware of especially the ones that think they see all at the tip top.

Be sure to check your logic and science at the door---its all about to be rendered useless.

posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 03:21 PM
No they can't. the tube itself can't. there could be an integrated one but chances are that you would notice it if there was one.

Xbox kinect, wii, cellphones, and webcams is what will be used to spy on you. Not so much television

posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 03:36 PM
reply to post by Gruffly

tempest - Optical Time-Domain Eavesdropping Risks of CRT Displays...

posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 03:36 PM
reply to post by mysterioustranger

any source?

posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 03:45 PM
reply to post by ThatGuy45

I'd be less worried about your tv watching you, and more worried about your computer watching you. If you have a webcam on your computer anyone with a basic knowledge of computers can remotely access your webcam and watch you.
edit on 3-12-2011 by TheMalacoda because: typo

posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 03:53 PM
reply to post by ThatGuy45

From what I've heard, its the digital cable boxes that have audio and video recording capabilities.

posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 04:02 PM

Originally posted by gabby2011
reply to post by ThatGuy45

I do think they have technology that can do this.. They have lots of secrets..that only a few are privy to..

I'm trying to read where I read exactly what you are talking about.. and I can't at the moment..

Scary stuff.. but I do believe it happens..

Yea i agree with gabby2011 the tech is definitely there but if a person is some kind of spy or something like that the government could run some sort of psy-op to give the same impressions.

edit on 3-12-2011 by King Seesar because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 04:59 PM
i cant believe you guys are dumb enough to be asking these questions.

not only are they watching you, but theyre watching your children too

posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 05:15 PM
No and no.They can't be used to watch or listen to you.

The watching bit first.

The latent image can not just fall onto an image sensor and be transformed into an accurate rendition of it without the use of a focusing device.Poke someone in the eye with a screwdriver so that the eye's lense is destroyed and we will only see light or dark and maybe the vaguest impression of colour.
If you can find a DSLR camera that will take photos without having a lens fitted,you'll find that as above we'll see light or dark and maybe some colour.
Build a camera obscura with the tiniest possible pinhole for a lens made with the very tip of a very sharp pin and observe how sharp the image is.Then gradually make the hole bigger and watch how quickly the image becomes blurred.This is the same as increasing the size of the aperture (smaller F number) on a modern camera,it lets more light in but has less depth of field,or less of the image will be in sharp focus.
So no it's impossible to take an image from any type of device that is designed to emit light.A cathode ray tube has no way of converting light that falls onto the outside of it's phosphor coating into a useable electrical signal,don't forget the electron beam scans the other side of that almost opaque layer of phosphor (either dots or one whole layer for B&W) so isolating it from the outside world.
An LCD display is the same because the layer that is used to activate the liquid crystal isn't photo voltaic,i.e. light falling on it won't generate an electrical current or change it's resistance in any way.
The same with a plasma screen,which is really nothing more than hundreds of thousands of tiny neon bulbs switched on and off by energising a grid placed behind them.It has no way of responding to light that falls on it,in exactly the same way an AMOLED screen can't which is just lots and lots of tiny LEDs.
Looking at it the other way round,an image sensor such as used in ALL modern still and video cameras is not and can never be emissive so can't display an image.
And of course all of the above with the added bonus of not having a focusing device.

The listening bit.

Yes most sound transducers can be used both ways.Any moving coil or piezo electric speaker will generate a voltage when sound hits it and makes it move,even a bass speaker can do this but because of it's weight any voices it picks up would sound very muffled.Smaller midrange and tweeter speakers make good microphones because of their much lighter cones,in the same way if you put an audio signal into a microphone it will act as a louspeaker.Of course it will always be a compromise when using something in a way it's not designed to be used,but at least it will work with the absolute minimum of extra components.Even a Cornflake box with a needle or pin stuck into the bottom of it will play music when pressed into the groove of a spinning record (don't try this with CDs please!).
But using a speaker as a sound receiver at the same time it's being used as a sound emitter is almost impossible.You'd have to switch it off for a short period of time to allow it stop it's natural motion before it can be used as a receiver,and then switch it back to being an emitter as soon as possible afterwards.The problem with this is that a moving coil speaker carries on moving under it's own momentum for some considerable time,so wouldn't be able to function as a microphone until it's completely stopped.Even if this was a matter of a few milliseconds,we'd still be able to hear it even on low quality speakers.
The other method which would work is a seperate microphone that could cancel out the sound coming out of the speakers with active noise cancelling.If you reverse the phase (- 180 deg) of the sound coming from the speakers and mix it with the sound the mic picks up from them,the phase difference will cancel out almost all of the speaker sound and will leave behind only ambient noise.This method has been used to restrict the noise from industrial plants by picking it up and phase shifting it 180 deg before playing it through arrays of powerful PA speakers.

Not quite true I guess as I've just proved they can listen,but more to the point is why would they?


P.S.Is anyone familiar with the theory that the voice of Leonardo De Vinci was recorded in his paintings?

posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 05:42 PM

Originally posted by Grifter81
reply to post by ThatGuy45

60hz is the screen refresh rate. You used to be able to tune into the signal from an old RF modulator with the right equipment, but it's much more difficult with a digital signal. Not impossible however. but to do it without any fuss your TV would have to include components that would send out their own signal to be picked up. As it stands a TV is just a receiver, unless it has WIFI. Then it can send and receive over a network.

Edit: I believe digital boxes can send and receive natively, be they sat/cable/terrestrial. So where one of these is used, add a camera and you have yourself a spying device I suppose.
edit on 2/12/2011 by Grifter81 because: (no reason given)

since 1996, from what I understand, ALL TV, are manufactured with devices that are able to SEND and not just receive.

top topics

<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in